Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform Reviews

Zscaler functions as a kind of proxy, but they lack responsiveness when it comes to customer requests. The granularity in blocking is not sufficient. For example, when a new domain is detected, it is automatically blocked for 30 days. If there is no further information, it is added to the trusted list. Attackers are aware of this and take advantage of it. They set up a benign site, get it categorized as safe, and then introduce malicious content afterward. Trying to get the categories reassigned or realigned is a challenge, as Zscaler is not very responsive in addressing such issues. In my experience, compared to BlueCoat, Zscaler falls short in terms of responsiveness.

I'm currently reviewing Zscaler for our organization. We implemented it about two years ago. It's part of our zero-trust architecture initiative. 

However, we need to compare it with NetScout. Zscaler has certain capabilities like SD-WAN, and the proxy is quite good. Although, I had to stop using SD-WAN because it wasn't integrating well with Microsoft or Kaspersky.

It is stable. In my experience of about five years, I have only encountered two problems caused by it. So, I wouldn't rate it a nine out of ten. It's generally stable, with occasional issues.

The scalability is pretty good. I would give it an eight out of ten. However, their responsiveness to customer concerns is not as strong as other vendors I have worked with.

There is definitely an ROI. Before I joined my current company, it was implemented about a year and a half ago, and it significantly reduced noise and improved team visibility. The SOC has always been satisfied with its performance. 

So, I believe there has been a good return on investment compared to my company's previous solution, Fortinet, which wasn't very effective. We are very happy with Zscaler.

When it was implemented, it beat the competition on price according to the two companies I know that have it.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

With Private Access, from TCS, we used to support multiple customers. Some of our customers will be utilizing Private Access and we'll be supporting them. 

Mainly due to the COVID pandemic situation, many people now work from home. When working from home they needed better connectivity for a VPN solution. That is the main criteria and customers are looking for a stable solution, a cloud-based solution, which can be integrated quickly and can be managed centrally. That is the driving point. The pandemic situation was the driver, as clients needed to add capacity also. Earlier, they would give this remote access solution only to a few people. Now nearly 90% of people work from home. The capacity has to be increased. For that, clients were looking for a multi-net solution and they started deploying Private Access.

The VPN is great for the stability on offer and for the cloud updates and insights you can get. We can protect the application well. There's no need to broadcast my network. Only the application will be visible, those kinds of things are very salient features.

The pricing is good as far as I know, although I don't have an idea of the exact pricing.

It offers great user-friendliness.

We like the customization capabilities.

It's straightforward to set up.

The scalability is good.

So far, we are happy with the solution. I can't speak to any missing features. Based on the customer feedback, they're doing good. We don't see any negative point at this point in time.

I've been using this solution for nearly three or four years. Some of our clients just started using the solution for one year.

The solution is scalable and expands well. 

I don't directly deal with technical support. 

Earlier, we used to stick with on-prem solutions, and compared to on-prem, we are leveraging all the cloud benefits. With this product, the updates and signatures will be there, live updates will be there, et cetera. We don't have to worry about all those updates from a Private Access point of view. From a security perspective, you're adding a lot of security to the VPN solution. Everything is fine.

I'm not involved in the initial setup. My job is to recommend the solution and another team will be doing the setup. We're a larger organization, so there are different teams that work with customers and provide solutions.

That said, my understanding is that the initial setup is very straightforward. 

The client needs to be deployed to the user machine. That typically is done with the Active Directory integration. If you are going to deploy it for multiple people, we need to deploy it, we need to push it using AD group policy or any other software distribution.  Other than that, it is easy only to deploy. We don't see much difficulty.

If we win that proposal, definitely our team will be involved in helping with the setup. 

I cannot speak to the exact licensing costs. 

We don't see any other, private, cloud-based VPN solution. There might be others, like Prisma, and there are so many solutions also coming out. Other than that, we are ready to explore new products. However, so far, whatever we have used within the Zscaler solution is doing good.

I work for a consultancy. My customers are manufacturing customers.

We recommend the solution to customers looking for a kind of non-cloud-based VPN solution.

Typically we will use the latest version of the solution. 

While there are so many customers still having on-premise solutions, we would definitely suggest cloud-based solutions and Zscaler would be in the top three we would recommend.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for its Zscaler Internet Access service. It provides web security, DLP, data protection, prevention, and lots more features.

It has improved our organization’s working process and efficiency.

It has some good data security and WIP features, providing secure Internet access. We get seamless access with our agents and users. It has some fantastic hardware. They have AI-powered integration with in-built features for the scheduler. It provides security and is connected to manage the security level, which is good.

The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.

I have been using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange for more than one year.

I don’t contact the support, but my team usually does.

Previously, I used Citrix.

The initial setup was straightforward. It took almost three months to deploy, but it was smooth.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The main purpose was to use it as a zero-trust solution. Or also to have control over the inbound and outbound traffic coming and going through the end user's device.

It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job.

It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address.

I have been using this solution for one and a half year. 

It is a stable product.

It is a scalable solution. Around 300 end users are using this solution.

The customer service and support have a good SLA. They return queries on time.  

Positive

I would say go ahead because it has a quite friendly interface. It has a lot of stuff you can do. If you are using the old infrastructure technique, you would love it because you can control most of your endpoints network on the device by a single interface. That is the Zscaler.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

There are many use cases, but primarily we have been utilizing it for cloud and web security purposes.

The solution offers a simplified network infrastructure and security functions, and it enables secure remote access for the users. 

Zscaler SASE provides a wide range of security features such as DIA, VPS, and VDS while maintaining a seamless performance.

We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution. It would be beneficial to ensure a smooth transition with no to minimal interruption of the operation.

I have been working with Zscaler SASE for two years.

The solution's stability relies on highly stable internet connectivity, so the absence or disruption of it directly affects the operations. 
I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

There have been some issues regarding the migration and flexibility of this solution while performing the integration of the data. 
I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

We are fairly satisfied with the customer support that is provided by Zscaler SASE's team. They are equipped with expert technicians and whenever we had to open the ticket with them, the issue was solved professionally. The only difficulty is time management as they might take some time to resolve what you asked for. I rate it eight out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup of Zscaler SASE's platform was efficient and user-friendly. I rate it eight out of ten. 

The implementation and deployment process took us a total of one and a half months.

Zscaler SASE is quite expensive compared to other solutions. The price is not fixed and it does not include all of the features, so my advice for organizations would be to evaluate their specific needs and budget to determine if this solution aligns with their requirements. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I would recommend this solution due to its exceptional user-friendly nature and comprehensive security capabilities. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

The tool is a proxy service that provides inspection of URL filtering for internet access. We have probably 20 or 30 different vendors that we work with in regards to carriers. These are all providers that we use that work in conjunction with that platform. It's an agent that's installed on all of our endpoints. We whitelist and blacklist and we allow certain websites, et cetera, using this product.

Overall, the solution does a pretty good job at web filtering.

The solution does a good job of allowing us to choose what to whitelist and blacklist.

The agent easily installs on the endpoints.

The solution needs to offer better scalability.

The product needs SAML integration. That's something they should work to add in future releases.

It needs to offer SSO, single sign-on, and items of that nature.

The product needs greater zero-trust. They need to focus more on zero-trust relationships.

I have been using the solution for about three and a half years at this point. It's been a while. 

The scalability is a weak point right now. Its scaling capabilities are lacking, and we'd like to see that improve in the future.

The solution is basically an agent that is installed on endpoints in order to provide security. It's not overly complicated.

We are not using the latest version of the solution. Currently, for example, we are one version back on that, as we don't typically do the most current version.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've, for the most part, been quite happy with its capabilities and the level of security it provides to us.

When I am outside of the company, I use Zscaler Private Access. I use Zscaler Private Access in the home, hotel, or wherever for remote working. It is a VPN.

We have a minimum of three to five thousand users minimum supported with Zscaler Private Access. It could be much more. They use it in the same way that I am using it. 

We have more solutions for connection with third party suppliers where we include contacts.

The only advantage I see is no more connection is required by the users. It is attached to the single-side logon with our key directory. That is the most valuable feature. 

With AT&T, we had another way to connect with the user. We had no single-side logon solution. Zscaler Private Access is a single-side logon solution.

We don't need to connect anymore. It is automatically connected when you log on in Windows. That is the only advantage I see because it is a bit slower.

We are supporting our supply-chain in India. Our connections through Zscaler have degraded drastically. Improvements are required in speed and bandwidth. 

The biggest disadvantage is there are no SCMP network layers available. The older network connection checks cannot be done because it's not included in the solution. 

We are programming our old solutions and they have not included support for legacy Windows. This is a huge disadvantage for me.

SCMP support would be one of the biggest improvements in my opinion. More speed improvements are also required. Very simple. 

If I need to monitor a third party supplier, if I have no SCMP, I cannot do the monitoring.

Some data may be cached if it is not available. This another important issue we have which needs to be improved, i.e. when the availability is not given the cache should not be used. 

At least we need Zscaler Private Access to make sure that the cache represents what is available to the users.

I am not involved in technical support for Zscaler Private Access. I create a ticket in our technical system and wait for an answer. I am still a project leader for this.

Everything is predefined so there is no mistake possible. Zscaler Private Access is attached to the active directory user. It is very easy. It is good.

We deployed with a system and it went very quick. It's a cloud solution. There is no private software to set up. Zscaler Private Access is quite easy and convenient in this way.

The installation was done at the global level. We did not use a reseller. Our company has since been merged with another corporation. We have now ninety thousand employees.

I was not involved in the choice of the solution. This was decided by our global network people.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Zscaler Private Access at only a three or four. 

The biggest disadvantage is the lack of SCMP network systems.  Also, the quality of the bandwidth is limited. We use normal internet access, not a fiber-optic line. 

The difference is huge, like flying in first-class vs. economy class. We stay in the economy class. The commercial company is saving money, but the end-user has lost the experience.

Zscaler Private Access is used for private data. You need to deploy Zscaler Private Access to put security and internal network after you build your application. The solution is used when you build an application and want to provide services to the public.

The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability.

Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its collaboration with applications without compromising security. The solution needs to improve native security, seamless protection, and user experience. Users should be able to access the solution anytime, and it should be made easy to install and easy to understand.

Zscaler Private Access needs to improve its customization.

I have been using Zscaler Private Access for two years.

Zscaler Private Access is a stable solution.

I rate Zscaler Private Access an eight out of ten for stability.

The solution’s scalability is very good.

The solution’s technical support is good.

The solution's initial setup is a little bit difficult and depends on your architecture knowledge.

The solution's deployment time depends on the infrastructure, the number of computers, and the number of employees.

Zscaler Private Access can be an expensive solution, depending on the license type you will purchase.

Zscaler Private Access is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Zscaler Private Access to other users.

Overall, I rate Zscaler Private Access a nine out of ten.